Read and learn new words!

THE haze from forest fires in Indonesia has caused significant
problems to everyone in Singapore. Public health concerns in particular
are of paramount importance.

If people have prolonged exposure to pollution in very unhealthy or
hazardous circumstances without adequate protection, there will be
serious health effects. This applies to everyone but especially to
vulnerable groups including the elderly, young children, pregnant women,
and those who have pre-existing respiratory and heart problems.

Even if you do not belong to any of these vulnerable groups, you are
likely to have loved ones who do. So this is personal, and health, even
lives, are at stake.

The responses so far from the Government and from the public raise
two important questions. Why were there negative public reactions? Can
we cope with this evolving crisis, especially if it gets worse?

Public reactions

IN TIMES of crisis, the Government is expected to provide relevant
and reliable information in a timely manner, and present it in a way
that the public can understand and act on. Public expectation is
especially strong in this haze crisis for several reasons.

The situation involves basic well-being issues such as personal
safety and health. There were many important unknowns, particularly in
the first few hours or days after the pollution level entered into very
unhealthy and hazardous ranges.

Many Singaporeans would have asked: What happens when I inhale the
polluted air? Is it safe to leave my house to go to work? What is
happening to my family who are experiencing physical discomfort caused
by the haze?

People's anxiety and fear increased significantly when visibility
declined and people experienced a strong smell of the haze and physical
discomfort even when they were indoors.

These emotions were magnified as people saw the Pollutant Standards
Index (PSI) reading on their television, computer or cellphone screen
rising rapidly, by a huge magnitude, and into the hazardous range.

In these anxious conditions, the public expected the Government to
provide information on what was going on, what the effects were, and
what protective action to take. To be fair, the Government did respond.
But some felt this was not fast enough, or that the responses were not
clear, or comprehensive enough. When people's expectations of
information and direction were disappointed, negative reactions to the
Government resulted.

Human beings find it difficult to tolerate uncertainty and ambiguity,
and we react to them negatively when the issue is personal or the
stakes are high. Studies have shown that negative reaction to an issue
will influence reactions to other issues, even if they are logically
unrelated to the offending issue.

Negative reactions lead us to doubt or ignore factual information.
This may explain the prevalence of comments doubting even the veracity
of the Government's PSI readings. We also seek out negative information
or interpret information negatively to reinforce our negative perception
of the target. Trust in the target's capability, intentions or
integrity will get eroded. The distrust will lead to more negative
reactions resulting in a negative spiral.

Reversing the spiral

IT IS important to break this spiral.

This requires action from both the Government and people.

On the part of the Government, there is a need for leaders and
policymakers to realise that given the severity and uncertainty of the
haze situation, the public anxiety and anger are natural, understandable
and justified.

The public needs relevant and complete information, accompanied by
explanation when it is incomplete. Prompt, accurate and clear public
health advisories are paramount.

The information shared and decisions made by the Government affect
the well-being of the people. So it is important to effectively address
doubts and concerns that the people have. Not doing so will create
confusion and distrust. These emotions and states of mind, which are
affected by the haze but will also affect how we as a society tackle it,
should not be trivialised or dismissed as cynicism and troublemaking.

Unlike the rare cases of intentional spread of falsehood, the
public's call for information arises from a genuine need for guidance
and is motivated by the need to make informed decisions.

If negative emotions are not adequately addressed, they will hinder
crisis management efforts and result in adverse consequences for public
health and well-being.

Given the way negativity spreads and its influence, there are also
medium and long-term effects. It will adversely affect our confidence in
the operational capability of the public service, trust in the
Government, and social resilience in Singapore.

The erosion of these fundamentals in our social compact is much more
difficult to restore than the economic growth numbers, after the haze
clears.

The spiral of negativity can be turned into something more positive.

Many behavioural studies have shown that people feel respected when
they are provided accurate and clear information and receive adequate
explanations for decisions that affect them.

They reciprocate with respect and trust. They are also more likely to
cooperate and engage in pro-social behaviours such as helping others,
putting up with inconveniences, complying with regulations, and offering
constructive suggestions.

We need these public responses in order to cope effectively with the evolving haze crisis.

People power

IF THE State can do better in terms of empathising with the need for
information and direction, and improving its communication, citizens too
have a critical role to play in helping each other cope.

The haze is expected to be prolonged due to the dry season and
monsoon winds. Its severity will fluctuate and sometimes the prediction
will be inaccurate. We need to be physically and psychologically
prepared, so that we can continue with our daily activities while
protecting our health. It is important to work together to tackle the
haze crisis, and we can be cautiously optimistic that we will cope well.

The Government has the primary duty to protect the safety and health
of its people. It is expected to anticipate problems and monitor
situations. It has to communicate public advisories effectively, which
means advisories that are evidence-based, clear and practical. It also
needs to adapt to changing circumstances based on facts, evidence,
public reactions, and well-informed judgments.

In the workplace, employers and supervisors are expected to ensure
the safety and health of employees. They need to make judgment calls, be
responsible in their decisions and accountable for their actions.
Employees' health and their perception of support from the organisation
will influence their job performance and organisational commitment.
Thus, ensuring employee health and well-being is also in the business
interest of the organisation.

Singaporeans are able and willing to adapt to change. As individuals,
we can take care of ourselves and our family by taking appropriate
precautions, look out for each other, especially those who are more
vulnerable, volunteer our help, and contribute resources to those in
need.

We can help communicate accurate and useful information to others in a calm manner.

We can also help by not propagating rumours, and by correcting
misinformation. Rumours cause public confusion, hindering timely and
effective crisis management. Misinformation leads people to make
decisions that are too conservative or risky without them realising so,
resulting in behaviours that are maladaptive.

The consequence could be an unnecessary inconvenience; but it could
also be an unnecessary depletion of critical resources - public or
personal.

The consumed public resources could have been directed to help those
in real need. Individuals' consumed personal resources could have been
used for their real need, particularly so for individuals and families
who could ill afford unnecessary use.

We want the country to keep running - not just to maintain economic
growth, but also to maintain essential services and approximate
normality for citizen well-being. What is ultimately at stake here is
not wealth, but health.